(7:53 - 8:11) The woman caught in adultery
This is one of the best-known and most-loved of all Bible stories,
but it shouldn't be in the Bible. For although some manuscripts put
it here, others after John 7:36 or 21:35, or Luke 21:38, it
is not found anywhere in the oldest and best
manuscripts.

The author of the SAB quotes Bart Ehrman as proof that
this verse doesn't belong in the Bible. Actually Bart Ehrman doesn't
believe that a single verse in the Bible is true. He would do away
with all verses in the Bible. As an authority he isn't therefore the last one I would consult on what verse belongs in the Bible.
But on the particulars, what would Bart Ehrman's teacher, Bruce Metzger have to say?

The arguments in its favor, internal even more than external,
are so powerful, that we can scarcely be brought to think it an
unauthorized appendage to the writings of one, who in another of his
inspired books, deprecated so solemnly the adding to or taking away
from the blessed testimony he was commissioned to bear (Rev. 22:18-19)... Why should not
St. John have inserted in this second edition ... this most edifying
and eminently Christian narrative?

On the contrary, the internal evidence suggests the exact
opposite: that the incident is an integral, forceful and therefore
original part of John's gospel chapters 7 to 10. For the incident
to dovetail with so many unrelated themes is surely beyond the
possibilities of coincidence or later scribal manipulation,
particularly in such a contextually sensitive place in John's
thematically-driven Gospel. ...
In passing, how interesting it is that the only incident in John's
Gospel involving professional, scholarly scribes is the one which not
only calls their credibility into question but is also precisely the
same one which was to suffer the most at their hands down through the
centuries.

2
And early in the morning
he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat
down, and taught them.

3
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a
woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4
They
say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5
Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what
sayest thou?

6
This they said, tempting him, that they might have to
accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the
ground, as though he heard them not.

7
So when they continued
asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without
sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

(8:7)
"He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at
her."
Jesus tells those who'd like to stone to death an adulteress that
whoever among them that is without sin should "cast the first
stone." Good advice -- but it directly contradicts the teachings of
the Old Testament (Lev.20:10). If
that wasn't a good law then, why did God make it? Has he since
changed his mind? If so, shouldn't it then be removed (along with
most of the OT) from the bible?How should adulterers
be punished?Does God approve of capital
punishment?

The author of the SAB interprets this verse as if Jesus
gave a general rule: “Don't stone adulteresses, for who is
without sin?” Taken as a rule, why punish anyone at all? Why
punish murders, because the punishers no doubt have sins of their own
as well. Such a meaning is ridiculous of course. And in other places
Jesus even affirms that he did not come to abolish the law, Matthew 5:17.
So to discern the meaning we have to look at the context. The first
thing we should note here is the objective of the Pharisees: that they
might have something to accuse him, verse 6. Under the
Roman occupation, the Jews had no power to bring anyone to death,
chapter 18:31. So if Jesus had said:
“Yes, she must be stoned,” the Pharisees would have
taken Jesus to the Roman governor, accusing him of sedition or
anything else they could accuse him of. But if Jesus had so no, they
would accuse him to all Jews willing to listen that Jesus had
made the law of Moses void. So it was a carefully laid out trap.
Jesus answer demonstrates his excellent wisdom. He does not say that
Moses is wrong, but he confirms the law and asks them to administer
it. So far from contradicting it, Jesus actually confirms Moses
here! Because where does he say that they shouldn't cast a stone?
And verses 10-11 does not contradict
that. Although Jesus was without sin, it was also true that at least
two witnesses of her crime were needed for a proper trial. One could
not just accuse and next stone people. As there were no witnesses, no
trial could be conducted. So Jesus let her go.
But as the almighty God, he also knew the accusation was true. So he
admonishes her to sin no more. What she did was sin. And she should do
that no more.

8
And again he
stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9
And they which heard it,
being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one,
beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left
alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10
When Jesus had lifted up
himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are
those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11
She said, No man,
Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no
more.

12
Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the
world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the
light of life.

In chapter 5:31 the context is
the human court and human witnesses. Just one witness wouldn't be
sufficient, at least two were needed, and Jesus appeals to a number of
other witnesses there. In verse 17 Jesus explicitly
appeals to that law and says he is not the only witness, but the
Father is a witness as well.
But in this verse he appears not as a mere human, but as God. Because he
knows whence he came (from heaven) and where he would go (back to
heaven). No human can claim that he knows where he wants to go to. We
all have our desires, but we don't know the future, James 4:13-15 and Acts 18:21, only God does.John Gill comments as follows:

which seems contradictory to what he says, in chapter 5:31, and may be reconciled thus; there he speaks
of himself as man, and in the opinion of the Jews, who took him to be
a mere man; and also as alone, and separate from his Father, as the
context shows; therefore his single testimony, and especially
concerning himself, could not be admitted as authentic among men; but
here he speaks of himself as a divine person, and in conjunction with
his Father, with whom he was equal; and therefore his testimony ought
to be looked upon, and received as firm and good, giving this as a
reason for it:

15
Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.

From the next verse (verse 16)
we can immediately see that the meaning of this verse is not, as the
author of the SAB takes it, that Jesus does not judge. What Jesus says
here is a shorthand for: “I judge no man after the
flesh.” That's the distinction Jesus makes here. The
Pharisees judged after the flesh, he did not judge in that particular
way.

16
And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone,
but I and the Father that sent me.

17
It is also written in your
law, that the testimony of two men is true.

18
I am one that bear
witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

19
Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered,
Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have
known my Father also.

20
These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as
he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not
yet come.

22
Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith,
Whither I go, ye cannot come.

23
And he said unto them, Ye are
from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.

24
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for
if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

(8:24)
"If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your
sins."
If you don't believe in Jesus, you will "die in your sins" (and
then go to hell).

Indeed, everyone shall once have to give account of
their life. And who does not sin?

25
Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them,
Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.

26
I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent
me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.

27
They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.

28
Then
said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall
ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as
my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.

29
And he that
sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those
things that please him.

30
As he spake these words, many believed on
him.

31
Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye
continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

32
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you
free.

(8:32) "The
truth shall make you free."

The meaning here is that the truth shall free people
from being a slave of sin, see verse 34, willing to do
its bidding anytime. I'm afraid the author of the SAB interprets this
verse as being free to sin.

33
They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage
to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

41
Ye do the deeds of your
father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one
Father, even God.

Indeed implying that. Making it clear that they knew
that Jesus was conceived when his mother was not married. As they only
allowed carnal interpretations, fornication was the only
explanation. But they knew the scriptures and had no excuse for not
knowing that a virgin would conceive, Is. 7:14.

42
Jesus said unto them, If God were your
Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither
came I of myself, but he sent me.

44
Ye are of
your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He
was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there
is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is
a liar, and the father of it.

(8:44) "Ye are
of your father the devil."
Jesus calls his opponents (the Jews) the sons of the devil.
(8:44)
"There is no truth in him [the devil]."
If so, then why did the devils call Jesus "the Christ, Son of God"?
(Lk.4:41) Were they lying then
too?

The meaning of: “There is no truth in
him.” is that the devil doesn't have love for truth. As
John Gill explains:

There is no truth in him, that is natural and genuine, and
essential to him; and if at any time he speaks it, it is not from his
heart, but because he is forced to it, or has an evil design in
it.

45
And because I tell you
the truth, ye believe me not.

46
Which of you convinceth me of
sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?

47
He that
is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye
are not of God.

48
Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we
not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?

49
Jesus answered,
I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me.

50
And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and
judgeth.

51
Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my
saying, he shall never see death.

(8:51)
"If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death."Must everyone die? (8:52) "Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that
thou hast a devil."
After Jesus makes the foolish claim that those who believe in him
will never die, his listeners reply, "now we know that thou hast a
devil."

52
Then said the Jews unto him, Now
we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou
sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.

Jesus claim wasn't foolish at all, it is a clear
doctrine taught in the Bible, see for example Rev. 2:11.

53
Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the
prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?

54
Jesus answered, If I
honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of
whom ye say, that he is your God:

55
Yet ye have not known him;
but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like
unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

(8:58) "Before
Abraham was, I am."
By saying "before Abraham was, I am," Jesus claims to be God.
Was he?

Of course, the Watchtower tries to change the
meaning of Jesus' words by having him say, "Before Abraham came
into existence I have been." I suppose this is supposed to mean
that he was around as the Archangel Michael back then or something.
(The NWT translates "ego eimi" as "I am" everywhere it occurs
except in this verse.)
(8:59 - 9:6) "Jesus hid himself, and went out of
the temple."Where did Jesus cure the blind
man?

56
Your father
Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

57
Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and
hast thou seen Abraham?

The reading of the author of the SAB is correct of
course and his comments are spot on. But it should be noted again that
the Jehovah's Witnesses actually believe very little of the Bible and
are not beyond translating it to conform with their doctrines.

59
Then took they up stones to
cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through
the midst of them, and so passed by.